Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Tribunal remands annuity policy issue for fresh review, adjusts royalty income valuation.</h1> The tribunal remanded the issue of annuity policies back to the first appellate authority for fresh adjudication, considering the assessee as an ... - Issues Involved:1. Whether annuity policies constitute taxable wealth of the assessee and the valuation thereof.2. Whether royalty in the hands of the assessee is a taxable asset/wealth and the valuation thereof.Detailed Analysis:Issue 1: Annuity Policies as Taxable WealthAssessment Order:The assessee received annuity policies in lieu of professional remuneration. These policies were taken out by cine producers to ensure a steady income for the assessee. The assessee claimed exemption from Wealth Tax (WT) on the ground that her accounts are on a cash basis. However, based on the Supreme Court's decision in CWT vs. Vyasraju Badrimurtiraj, the claim was deemed untenable. The annuity policies were considered valuable assets and taxable as wealth. The policies were not covered by exemptions under sections 2(e)(2), 5(1)(via), or 5(1)(vii) of the WT Act. The valuation was determined by discounting the future income at 4% per year, resulting in a taxable value of Rs. 4,27,680.First Appellate Authority:The discounting rate of 4% was considered too low. A rate of 12% was deemed reasonable, aligning with the interest rate of National Savings Certificates. Using a discounting rate of 12%, the valuation was recalculated to Rs. 2,89,696, providing the assessee a relief of Rs. 1,37,984 for the assessment year 1982-83. The same method was directed to be applied for the assessment years 1983-84 and 1984-85.Tribunal's Decision:The assessee was identified as an 'Assignee' rather than a 'Purchaser' or 'Annuitant'. Based on the definition of 'Assignment of income' from Black's Law Dictionary, nothing is taxable in the hands of the assessee regarding annuity policies. The matter was remanded back to the first appellate authority for fresh adjudication, requiring the assessee to provide all policies issued by LIC and alleged to be annuity policies.Issue 2: Royalty as Taxable WealthAssessment Order:The assessee, a renowned singer, received royalty income from record sales. This right to receive royalty was considered a valuable asset. The average yearly royalty income over the past five years was calculated to be Rs. 5,03,861, rounded to Rs. 5,00,000. Capitalizing this income at 12% interest, the capital worth of the asset was determined to be Rs. 41,50,000 for WT assessment.First Appellate Authority:The average royalty income was recalculated over a 10-year period, resulting in an average of Rs. 4,44,000 per annum. Using a discounting rate of 12% and a multiple of 5.65, the value of the royalties was determined to be Rs. 24,86,000 for the assessment year 1982-83. The same method was directed to be applied for the assessment years 1983-84 and 1984-85.Tribunal's Decision:The tribunal noted that royalty income was becoming doubtful and decreasing. An example from the Law & Practice of Gift Tax & Wealth Tax was adopted, suggesting a multiple of 2.402 for capitalizing the royalty income. The orders of the lower authorities were modified accordingly, directing a revised valuation based on this multiple.Conclusion:The tribunal remanded the issue of annuity policies back to the first appellate authority for fresh adjudication, considering the assessee as an 'Assignee'. For the royalty income, the tribunal adopted a multiple of 2.402 for valuation, modifying the orders of the lower authorities. The revenue succeeded partially, and the assessee's appeals were deemed partly successful on merits and partly for statistics.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found